By Bing Wang and Alfred M. Wu

Is China Modernizing Meritocracy for Public Governance?

Although
China has enjoyed spectacular economic growth and steady improvement in living
standards over the past five decades, a large number of Chinese people felt demoralized
because of rampant corruption, social injustice, and moral degradation not only
among government officials but also ordinary people in the other sectors. In recent
years, President Xi Jinping, amid controversy about his domestic and foreign
policies, has raised some expectations among the general public about the
positive future of the country. After the 18th National Congress of the
Communist Party of China (CPC) in 2012 when Xi took the Party leadership, as he
claimed, the party and nation will be fundamentally regenerated. Particularly, after
the 19th National Congress of the CPC in late 2017, Xi will expectedly govern
the CPC and China for the next years, and probably continue to dominate the
country’s politics for decades.

Moreover,
a great strategy has been raised by Xi; a so-called fresh, brand-new mode of public
governance has been experimented, and a new world order is
emerging. It is argued that those who will be alive around 2050 will witness the
rise of China to an unprecedented level. More fundamentally, Xi emphasizes
meritocracy and would like to apply it to every corner of public governance in
China. A question arises naturally: whether meritocracy, which the Chinese views
as a tradition and may be regenerated by the Xi regime, can enlighten public
governance in China and beyond?

Does Meritocracy Work in China?

According
to Daniel Bell at
Harvard University, meritocracy could also trace its root in Western political
tradition back to ancient Greek philosopher Plato and Aristotle, who shared the
similar idea with their contemporary oriental counterpart Confucius. However,
the subtle linkage between Plato’s philosopher king and totalitarianism, autocracy and paternalism has gained
meritocracy a derogatory reputation relative to democracy in Western mainstream
political theories. In fact, the US politics is the balance between meritocracy
and democracy, while the former is a
failure because of the entrenched dysfunctions of the elites,
and the latter is decaying for “vetocracy,
a situation in which it was easier to stop government from doing things than it was to use government to promote the
common good”, according to Francis Fukuyama.
Ultimately, the anti-intellectualism, anti-elitism, and populism are
rising, and America may need to reform “elites the Confucian way”, argued by Professor James Hankins from
History Department at Harvard University.

On the
contrary, China has a much stronger
tradition of meritocracy than the US. It
had launched the imperial
examination since the 7th century during the Sui
Dynasty, and ever since, most officials in the governments were mainly
evaluated and promoted by their merit order. The CPC and every levels of the
Chinese government principally follow this mechanism, making the Chinese regime
much different from totalitarianism, autocracy
and authoritarianism in their classic meanings.

Elites
could corrupt, and China’s meritocracy could decay as well. The prominent
difference of Xi Jinping from his two predecessors, Hu Jintao and Jiang Zemin,
is his determination on anti-corruption. After taking power since 2012, he has
done one thing that was thought remarkable and significant, that was, anti-corruption and purifying the CPC again. Consequently, a number
of top officials, such as Zhou Yongkang, a
former member of Politiburo Standing
Committee, Bo Xilai, Sun Zhengcai, two
members of Politiburo, and Xu Caihou, Guo Boxiong, two
former vice Chairmen of the Military Central Committee, and more than one million senior
and junior officials, had been disciplined. Some were arrested
and prosecuted. Some speculations, criticisms and even rumors remain, such as seeing
Xi’s anti-corruption campaign as faction and
purging, cult, and Xitocracy, but failing
to recognize his determination in fighting corruption would cost people to misunderstand
his policy and its fundamental practical implications.

Self-Discipline and Self-Purification

Self-discipline
and self-purification are claimed to be an advantage of the CPC. Amid the
debate surrounding one important CPC’s norm and consensus, the retirement
requirement for preventing older cadres from controlling the power — “seven-up, eight-down” rule, the appointment of Wang
Qishan, anti-corruption tsar, as a vice president of China has indicated that under
the Xi regime, anti-corruption and self-purification are far more important
than anything else.

Meritocracy,
which has been practiced for centuries in China amid many controversies and
difficulties, can enlighten public governance and corruption reduction in
today’s China.

“Seven-up,
eight-down” rule was introduced in 2002 at the 16th Party Congress, meaning
those who are 67 years old or younger are eligible for re-selection to the
Politburo Standing Committee, while those who are 68 years old or older must step
down. According to this rule, Wang, the head of the Central Commission for
Discipline Inspection (CCDI) and the most important aide of Xi on the anti-corruption
campaign, born in 1948 and 69 years old in 2017, stepped down from the
Politburo Standing Committee. Interestingly, Wang was elected to be
vice-president in March 2018. It indicates the recognition of the achievements
of anti-corruption led by Wang in the past. In the meantime, Wang might serve
as an advisor to Xi on anti-corruption and self-purification matters.

Through
reducing corruption, the Chinese government aims to restore meritocracy in the
country. Latterly the CPC has been infusing self-discipline and self-purification
to itself again, which has been recognized as the guarantee of its vitality, legality and legitimacy by the public. Under the
so called Xitocracy, not only the bottom and middle levels of the CPC members but the top Central Committee with
about 200 members, Politburo with about 25 members, and its Standing Committee
with 7 members, should all be even more strictly disciplined and law-abiding than
ordinary people.

This is
a coincident with the Western tradition “With great power comes great
responsibility”, as well as Confucius’
enlightenment, “To govern means to rectify. If you lead the people with correctness, who will dare
not to be correct?” Following this logic, Xi and the CPC stress that the key of
governing China just rests upon strictly disciplining the CPC leadership and
members, particularly those top leaders in the Central Committee, the Politburo,
and its Standing Committee. The Comprehensively and Strictly Disciplining on the
CPC (quanmian
congyan zhidang)
has been launched as a clean-up movement by the CPC itself. Of course, how
effective and sustainable this movement could be is an open question.

Although
China does not have a Western style general
election and is implicitly following meritocracy, the CPC promotes strict
criteria and competition wherein CPC leaders are carefully selected, trained,
and evaluated. Many members in the Politburo and its Standing Committee, though
they are political elites, are born into ordinary families, earned their higher
education, promoted through careful screening
and fierce competition, trained and nurtured in one, two, or even more provinces
as local top leaders, cumulated abundant experiences in governing constituents,
and then are finally selected as national political leaders. As political entrepreneurs,
they need to try their best to push economic development, particularly aiming
at GDP in the past but have more diversified goals now with green growth and
poverty reduction included in their terms. Even many of those corrupt
officials, indeed, have made great efforts in promoting economic development in
their political lives.

Through
nurturing political elites and purifying ruling party members, the CPC has
contributed to the modern version of meritocracy. Meritocracy, which has been
practiced for centuries in China amid many controversies and difficulties, can
enlighten public governance and promote corruption reduction in today’s China. The
Chinese experience, especially the CPC regime, can speak to and shed light on
other developing countries’ public governance, which is a global concern with
many developing countries struck by poor governance. Meritocracy, through
carefully promoting and disciplining political elites and Xi style public
policy with a great emphasis on anti-corruption and poverty reduction, should
be understood thoroughly, which will eventually contribute to human wellbeing.

About The Author

Bing Wang is a
professor at College of Public Administration, Huazhong University of Science
and Technology, China and author of The Open Public Value Account and
Comprehensive Social Development: An Assessment of China and the United States. Alfred M. Wu is an
associate professor at Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, National
University of Singapore, and author of Governing Civil Service Pay in
China, and he tweets at @alfredmwu.